Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I don't put much trust in a production where interviews are so heavily edited like that. Nor do I trust a reporter who self-promotes is image so vagrantly. That thing "feels" more like an advert for him than anything else. I'd like to see some more independent verification/ testing of the "consipiracy theory" in the 2nd half of the story.

However I have the following articles which precede the above journo's "investigations".

Share on other sites

BP - legitamite epidemiologists will be relying on exactly the information being covererd by these investigative journalists as they try to established how this virus was able to spread so widely without detection. Why? because, increasingly, there is evidence that the CCP (to make clear the distinction) tried to hide the initial outbreaks in Wuhan, did not advise the WHO at the first oportunity as they are legally required to do per the charter they signed up to. The CCP has publically stated that they blamed America for the outbreak, then when that didn't work, Italy. Attempting to control the narrative by lying is straight out of Engels and Marx's writings. Determining whether or not that is the case here is not tin foil hat thinking, unless of course by proposing such a concept without basis you too wish to control the narrative.

"...the only basis for justice is truth, becasue justice means truth for all."